NationStates Jolt Archive

Hey all,

I've submitted a proposal for a Planetary Defense System in which we can defend our planet from asteroids and the like. It's currently awaiting approval from delegates, so if you would, please look at it and determine if it is worthy of consideration. Thanks.

Here's the proposal:

Planetary Defense System
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.

Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: All Businesses
Proposed by: Timberlacia

Description: In conjunction with UN Resolution #64 (Tracking Near Earth Objects), we hereby propose all nations work together to develop and implement a Planetary Defense System in order to destroy incoming threats from outer space.

These threats, called Near Earth Objects (NEOs), could cause catastrophic devastation on a global scale.

In some cases, evacuation of an area before an impending impact may be sufficient.

However, immense loss of life, environmental changes, and perhaps even global extermination may be a result should a larger NEO threaten our planet.

From this Resolution, we hope to achieve the following:

1. Harness all NEO data from all member nations under Resolution #64 in order to determine if there are any impending threats.

2. Establish a contact within the highest levels of government of all member nations to deal exclusively with this.

3. Partnering with all nations' militaries and their scientific communities, develop a Planetary Defense System in order to protect our planet from incoming NEOs.
4. Establish a branch of the United Nations to monitor the incoming NEO data and to make determinations when to use the Planetary Defense System.

It is imperative for the survival of our planet to develop this Planetary Defense System. If we dismiss this issue now, it may be too late when we really need it.

Approvals: 15 (Gaiah, Limster, The Derrak Quadrant, WZ Forums, Joshisha, Coco Mango, Zhukhistan, Tronta, Saysomething, America---, Nan Og, Orioni 2, Morganix, Komer, Das freie Land)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 134 more approvals)
Voting Ends: Fri Mar 11 2005

My top scientists assure me that your nation is far more likely than mine to suffer the ill effects of an asteroid strike.

So why don't you pay for it, and my country will just sell you equipment and reap the benefits of the system?

Shouldn't the catagory be "International Security" instead of "Environmental?"

Shouldn't the catagory be "International Security" instead of "Environmental?"
prob not boss, cos it is against asteroids (enviromental) not aliens (security)

prob not boss, cos it is against asteroids (enviromental) not aliens (security)
True, but it involves building weapons to use against the asteroids, which would fall under the "International Security" catagory.

hmmmm..... yeah.... it is questionable as to where this would fall cause it could go either way.... and also, in that event, what happens if an alien ship is mistaken for an asteroid, and we shoot it?

hmmmm..... yeah.... it is questionable as to where this would fall cause it could go either way.... and also, in that event, what happens if an alien ship is mistaken for an asteroid, and we shoot it?
Hope we destroy it before they can contact their friends.:D

Also this has been tried before and failed Space Defense Initiaive (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Space_Defense_Initiative_%28failed%29) and it was under the International Security catagory.

I put it as 'environmental' since if the earth is destroyed by an asteroid, that's impacting out environment more than our security, I suppose. Well, if that's the case, I guess everything's pretty much affected. It was a coin toss.

Hope we destroy it before they can contact their friends.:D

Also this has been tried before and failed Space Defense Initiaive (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Space_Defense_Initiative_%28failed%29) and it was under the International Security catagory.
hell yeah
ahh k, doesnt surprise me that it failed, especially since some nations concider themselves to be from outer space

True, but it involves building weapons to use against the asteroids, which would fall under the "International Security" catagory.

It's quite possible that any defence against comets and asteroids would not involve "weaponry" commonly associated the military.

Comets are increasingly thought to be more like flying piles of rubble than single lumps of rock, so an Armageddon drill in and set off the nukes technique might not work. Alternatives include wrapping an asteroid in silver foil, and letting the increased reflection of sunlight push it gradually off path.

It's quite probable that a single defence system would not be the best solution - rather it might be better to encourage much more research into a range of defence techniques, then use the most appropriate approach when we detect a particular threat.

Alternatives include wrapping an asteroid in silver foil, and letting the increased reflection of sunlight push it gradually off path.


Hahahaha lol!
Brilliant, Tonight we rest safe in the knoledge _Myopia_'s silver foil industry is seeking a boost.

Silver foil! Classic. :D

Hahahaha lol!
Brilliant, Tonight we rest safe in the knoledge _Myopia_'s silver foil industry is seeking a boost.

Silver foil! Classic. :D

OOC: That is in fact a serious suggestion. New Scientist 19 April 2003 - I've dug up the article from their archive. Turns out it was actually asteroids they were talking about as piles of rubble, not comets - sorry. I also misremembered the scientific reason why the coating works. Here are a few of the salient points:

Holsapple calculates that a megaton nuclear blast 200 metres away would push a 1-kilometre rubble-pile asteroid only a thousandth as effectively as it would a solid body. So to deflect a 1-kilometre asteroid you'd need a 1-megaton blast up close, says Holsapple. To deflect a 10-kilometre asteroid like the one that saw off the dinosaurs, you'd need a 1-gigaton bomb - a hundred times more powerful than any ever tested.

As the asteroid rotates, the "Yarkovsky effect" comes into play. Several hours after having the Sun directly overhead, the surface re-emits absorbed energy in the infrared. The asteroid effectively donates some momentum to the infrared photons, and recoils, altering its orbit.

This sets the stage for a big idea. Most asteroids are so dark they absorb all but a few per cent of the incident light, but if they were coated with something shiny or white, the light would bounce off instead. If the energy is not absorbed, it cannot be emitted later. So a whitewash would all but remove the Yarkovsky effect on the asteroid's orbit. In the absence of the effect, a typical killer near-Earth asteroid will be deflected by a few millimetres per second from the path it would have taken. Over a couple of centuries, that would be enough for it to miss the Earth.

But how could we possibly hope to change an asteroid's surface properties? Compared to timing a nuke or training a solar concentrator, it is relatively easy, says Jon Giorgini of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Splatting the surface with white paint could do it, but the quantity needed would be heavy and expensive to transport to the asteroid's orbit. More likely, reflective glass beads or a white powder, such as chalk dust, would be fired into the asteroid's gravitational field. Because the field is so irregular, the particles would bounce to ground over a variety of different trajectories, eventually covering the entire surface.

But to make the covering really even, Giorgini favours a solar sail. If a giant piece of reflective material were unfolded in the path of the asteroid, it could be made to envelop it, covering the whole thing like a giant birthday present. "It's technology we could do now," says Giorgini, although it will take centuries to work.

Other ideas include attaching rocket engines to the asteroid and flying it off course, and using a solar concentrator - a giant parabolic mirror - to focus light onto the asteroid, causing evaporation from the point at which the light shines, thus giving the asteroid momentum in the opposite direction.

Thank you _Myopia_ for listing the article ( which we are not supposed to reference in these forums! :confused: ) i will b sure to look up and read the article.
I am aware of solar Sail theory in which an object could, In theory, be propelled through space at incredible speeds using the "solar Winds".

It was the idea of wrapping a whole cosmic body such as a comet, meteor or astroid in tin foil that i found so amusing. Like a giant baked potato. :D

Thanks for making me laugh so loud.

Thank you _Myopia_ for listing the article ( which we are not supposed to reference in these forums! :confused: )
There's no rule against posting links in the forums that I've ever heard of. There is a hard and fast rule about not using real-life figures or references in proposals, there is an unofficial rule that recommends strongly against trying to prove your thesis using primarily real-world reference There is no problem that I can see with using linked articles in quasi-off-topic discussions to save yourself typing a few thousand wordsUse 'em when they make sense, and be ready to defend those points when they inevitably get countered. 'K?

gocha! :D

I put it as 'environmental' since if the earth is destroyed by an asteroid, that's impacting out environment more than our security, I suppose. Well, if that's the case, I guess everything's pretty much affected. It was a coin toss.
"Environmental" also involves screwing over businesses ("...at the expense of business"). This Proposal isn't punishing business; it belongs in 'International Security'.

"Environmental" also involves screwing over businesses ("...at the expense of business"). This Proposal isn't punishing business; it belongs in 'International Security'.
It's good to be right.:D

Thank you _Myopia_ for listing the article ( which we are not supposed to reference in these forums! :confused: ) i will b sure to look up and read the article.
I am aware of solar Sail theory in which an object could, In theory, be propelled through space at incredible speeds using the "solar Winds".

It was the idea of wrapping a whole cosmic body such as a comet, meteor or astroid in tin foil that i found so amusing. Like a giant baked potato. :D

Thanks for making me laugh so loud.

S'ok - quite like the idea myself. It doesn't carry with it the inherent risk of launching nuclear weapons out of Earth orbit on top of giant explosive rocket engines.

Frisbeeteria, is it possible for a proposal to say something like "Noting that the general consensus among the scientific community is that..." or "Recognising the theory backed by some scientists that..." - basically assuming that the NS scientific community feels similarly overall to the RL scientific community?

This idea sounds rather similar to the missile defence system proposed in the 80's. Of course, that was to be used to defend against nuclear attack, this is to be used against asteroids.

I agree though, I think this should be classed as a matter of international security as it is concerned with the use of military technology in the defence of the planet.